The Use of Melatonin by Children: Parents' Perspectives

Factors contributing to U.S. parents' decisions to administer melatonin to children

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric melatonin use is increasingly prevalent in the U.S. despite limited research on its efficacy and long-term safety. The current study investigated factors contributing to parents' decisions whether to give children melatonin.

METHODS

Parents of children 1.0-13.9 years completed an online questionnaire on children's health, sleep, and melatonin use. Parents who reported giving melatonin to their child were asked open-ended follow-up questions on why their child takes melatonin and why they stopped (if applicable). Responses were assigned to categories through thematic coding.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed on 212 children who either consumed melatonin in the past 30 days (n = 131) or took melatonin previously (n = 81). Among children who recently took melatonin, 51.1 % exhibited bedtime resistance and 46.2 % had trouble falling asleep. Parents most commonly gave children melatonin to: help them fall asleep (49.3 %), wind down before bedtime (22.7 %), facilitate changes in their sleep routine (17.5 %), and/or change their circadian rhythm (11.4 %). Parents stopped giving melatonin because their child did not need it anymore (32.0 %), experienced negative side effects (9.3 %), and/or concerns about health and safety (13.3 %). Finally, parents initiated melatonin use on their own (50.0 %), were encouraged by a friend or family member (27.4 %), and/or followed the recommendation of a health provider (48.1 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Parents administered melatonin to children for a number of reasons and discontinued melatonin based on their own observations of a variety of effects. Parents frequently initiated use without the recommendation of a medical professional. Further research on indications and efficacy of melatonin and wider dissemination of guidelines are needed to help parents make informed decisions regarding children's sleep health.

Use of melatonin in children and adolescents with idiopathic chronic insomnia: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and clinical recommendation

Background

Melatonin prescriptions for children and adolescents have increased substantially during the last decade. Existing clinical recommendations focus on melatonin as a treatment for insomnia related to neurodevelopmental disorders. To help guide clinical decision-making, we aimed to construct a recommendation on the use of melatonin in children and adolescents aged 5-20 years with idiopathic chronic insomnia.

Methods

A systematic search for guidelines, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials (RCT) were performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Guidelines International Network, Trip Database, Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, American Academy of Sleep Medicine, European Sleep Research Society and Scandinavian Health Authorities databases. A search for adverse events in otherwise healthy children and adolescents was also performed. The latest search for guidelines, systematic reviews, and adverse events was performed on March 18, 2023. The latest search for RCTs was performed on to February 6, 2023. The language was restricted to English, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish. Eligible participants were children and adolescents (5-20 years of age) with idiopathic chronic insomnia, in whom sleep hygiene practices have been inadequate and melatonin was tested. There were no restrictions on dosage, duration of treatment, time of consumption, or release formula. Primary outcomes were quality of sleep, daytime functioning and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included total sleep time, sleep latency, awakenings, drowsiness, quality of life, all-cause dropouts, and non-serious adverse events. Outcomes were assessed at different time points to assess short-term and long-term effects. Meta-analysis was performed using inverse variance random-effects model and risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. If possible, funnel plots would be constructed to investigate publication bias. Heterogeneity was calculated via I² statistics. A multidisciplinary guideline panel formulated the recommendation according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The certainty of evidence was considered either high, moderate, low or very low depending on the extent of risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, or publication bias. The evidence-to-decision framework was subsequently used to discuss the feasibility and acceptance of the constructed recommendation alongside the impact on resources and equity. The protocol is registered with the Danish Health Authority.

Findings

We included eight RCTs with 419 children and adolescents with idiopathic chronic insomnia. Melatonin led to a moderate increase in total sleep time by 30.33 min (95% confidence interval (CI) 18.96-41.70, 4 studies, I² = 0%) and a moderate reduction in sleep latency by 18.03 min (95% CI -26.61 to -9.44, 3 studies, I² = 0%), both as assessed by sleep diary. No other beneficial effects were found. None of the studies provided information on serious adverse events, yet the number of participants experiencing non-serious adverse events was increased (Relative risk 3.44, 95% CI 1.25-9.42, 4 studies, I² = 0%). Funnel plots were not constructed due to the low number of studies. The certainty of evidence was very low on the quality of sleep and low for daytime functioning.

Interpretation

Evidence of very low certainty shows that benefits are limited and unwanted events are likely when melatonin is used to treat otherwise healthy children and adolescents with chronic insomnia. Melatonin should never be the first choice of treatment for this particular population, yet carefully monitored short-term use may be considered if sleep hygiene practices and non-pharmacological interventions have proven inadequate, and only if daytime function is compromised.

Funding

The Danish Health Authority and the Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital supported by the Oak Foundation.

Factors associated with melatonin use in child sleep disturbance: A survey of Australian parents

OBJECTIVE

Sleep disturbances are prevalent in Australian children and cause a significant amount of stress to both children and their parents. If sleep disturbances are left untreated, they can result in detrimental consequences to both child and parental wellbeing. While behavioural interventions are recognised as the gold standard treatment for paediatric insomnia, there is a growing use of melatonin from both prescription and non-prescription sources in paediatrics. However, empirical research on the efficacy and safety of melatonin for children is sparse, conflicting, and inconsistent. This first Australian study aimed to investigate correlates of melatonin use in a sample of children with sleep disturbance in Australia and assess whether melatonin is being administered to children contrary to Therapeutic Goods Administration Guidelines.

METHODS

An exploratory online study was undertaken with 318 parents of Australian children with sleep disturbance (95.30% females). Logistic regression, mediation and descriptive analysis were conducted.

RESULTS

As hypothesised, higher parental stress, older child age, and a diagnosis of ADHD were significantly associated with melatonin use in this sleep disturbed sample. Other potential correlates such as financial stress, number of household dependents, child sleep disturbance, and autism were not significantly associated with melatonin use in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

Findings show off-label melatonin use in children with sleep disturbance is prevalent. For the first time, this study showed an indirect path linking child sleep disturbances with melatonin use via parental stress. Overall, while the safety of melatonin use remains unknown, there is a clear need to mitigate parental stress to minimise potentially unmonitored and improper use of melatonin in children.

Melatonin Treatment for Pediatric Patients with Insomnia: Is There a Place for It?

Sleep is a vital physiological function that is impaired in ranges from 10% in the typically developing pediatric population to over 80% in populations of children with neurodevelopmental disorders and/or psychiatric comorbidities. Pediatric insomnia disorder is an increasing public health concern given its negative impact on synaptic plasticity involved in learning and memory consolidation but also on mood regulation, hormonal development and growth, and its significant impact on quality of life of the child, the adolescent and the family. While first-line treatment of pediatric insomnia should include parental education on sleep as well as sleep hygiene measures and behavioural treatment approaches, pharmacological interventions may be necessary if these strategies fail. Melatonin treatment has been increasingly used off-label in pediatric insomnia, given its benign safety profile. This article aims to identify the possible role of melatonin treatment for pediatric insomnia, considering its physiological role in sleep regulation and the differential effects of immediate release (IR) versus prolonged release (PR) melatonin. For the physician dealing with pediatric insomnia, it is particularly important to be able to distinguish treatment rationales implying different dosages and times of treatment intake. Finally, we discuss the benefit-risk ratio for melatonin treatment in different pediatric populations, ranging from the general pediatric population to children with different types of neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder or ADHD.

Evaluating a nurse-led sleep support intervention to reduce melatonin prescribing in children and young people

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance, often arising from the way parents manage their child's sleep, affects 40% of children and leads to increased demand on clinical services. Children and young people with significant sleep issues can be treated effectively with a supportive approach but are often prescribed the hormone melatonin because of a lack of available support services.

AIM

To understand the effect and clinical implications of a nurse-led sleep support clinic on melatonin prescribing in children and young people.

METHOD

A retrospective case note evaluation was undertaken of a nurse-led sleep support service delivering a bespoke programme and follow-up support to a patient group of 124 children and young people, 104 of whom had co-morbidities.

RESULTS

A total of 78 (63%) patients were successfully discharged without melatonin prescriptions after a median of two face-to-face clinic visits and three telephone calls. Eleven out of 12 patients had not restarted melatonin after 12 months.

CONCLUSION

A nurse-led, non-pharmacological approach to sleep support in children and young people can provide an effective, sustainable alternative to melatonin prescribing. The authors recommend that appropriate sleep support should be administered and the response reviewed before melatonin is prescribed. Investment in sleep services to support this approach is important.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for non-respiratory sleep disturbance in children with neurodisabilities: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty about the most appropriate ways to manage non-respiratory sleep disturbances in children with neurodisabilities (NDs).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of NHS-relevant pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to manage sleep disturbance in children and young people with NDs, who have non-respiratory sleep disturbance.

DATA SOURCES

Sixteen databases, including The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE, were searched up to February 2017, and grey literature searches and hand-searches were conducted.

REVIEW METHODS

For pharmacological interventions, only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. For non-pharmacological interventions, RCTs, non-randomised controlled studies and before-and-after studies were included. Data were extracted and quality assessed by two researchers. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis were undertaken. Data on parents' and children's experiences of receiving a sleep disturbance intervention were collated into themes and reported narratively.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies were included. Sample sizes ranged from 5 to 244 participants. Thirteen RCTs evaluated oral melatonin. Twenty-six studies (12 RCTs and 14 before-and-after studies) evaluated non-pharmacological interventions, including comprehensive parent-directed tailored (n = 9) and non-tailored (n = 8) interventions, non-comprehensive parent-directed interventions (n = 2) and other non-pharmacological interventions (n = 7). All but one study were reported as having a high or unclear risk of bias, and studies were generally poorly reported. There was a statistically significant increase in diary-reported total sleep time (TST), which was the most commonly reported outcome for melatonin compared with placebo [pooled mean difference 29.6 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.9 to 52.4 minutes; p = 0.01]; however, statistical heterogeneity was extremely high (97%). For the single melatonin study that was rated as having a low risk of bias, the mean increase in TST was 13.2 minutes and the lower CI included the possibility of reduced sleep time (95% CI -13.3 to 39.7 minutes). There was mixed evidence about the clinical effectiveness of the non-pharmacological interventions. Sixteen studies included interventions that investigated the feasibility, acceptability and/or parent or clinician views of sleep disturbance interventions. The majority of these studies reported the 'family experience' of non-pharmacological interventions.

LIMITATIONS

Planned subgroup analysis was possible in only a small number of melatonin trials.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence of benefit for melatonin compared with placebo, but the degree of benefit is uncertain. There are various types of non-pharmacological interventions for managing sleep disturbance; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity, few RCTs, a lack of standardised outcome measures and risk of bias means that it is not possible to draw conclusions with regard to their effectiveness. Future work should include the development of a core outcome, further evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and research exploring the prevention of, and methods for identifying, sleep disturbance. Research mapping current practices and exploring families' understanding of sleep disturbance and their experiences of obtaining help may facilitate service provision development.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016034067.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.